Is Henry county minnesota refusing to hand over illegal immigrants on detainer

1. What the question actually asks and why the available reporting can’t answer it directly

The user is asking whether a named local jurisdiction in Minnesota is refusing ICE detainers; none of the provided articles mention “Henry County, Minnesota,” so the specific claim cannot be confirmed or denied from these sources alone (p1_s1–^[10]5). The coverage instead documents a state-level dispute: DHS and ICE officials have publicly accused Minnesota jurisdictions of refusing detainers, while Minnesota corrections officials and the attorney general counter that DHS’s figures are inaccurate and that state law constrains how local jails may respond to civil detainers ^{[1] [2] [3] [5]}.

2. The federal accusation: DHS says many detainers weren’t honored

DHS and ICE leadership have asserted that hundreds to more than a thousand ICE detainers in Minnesota were not honored, accusing local officials of releasing “criminal illegal aliens” back onto the streets and using named cases to make the point ^{[1] [6]}. The department’s public messaging has included examples and counts that fueled the White House’s demand for more cooperation and prompted a national spotlight on Minnesota’s enforcement posture ^{[7] [6]}.

3. Minnesota’s response: data disputes and legal limits on holding people for ICE

Minnesota corrections officials have pushed back forcefully, saying the DHS figures are false or misleading and noting the state prison system does honor detainers while county jails are governed by different rules; the DOC and state prison head said they verified their own counts and found far fewer detainers in county jails than DHS claimed ^{[2] [3]}. The state attorney general issued a formal legal opinion concluding that Minnesota law prohibits holding someone in custody solely because of an ICE civil detainer—detainers are requests, not commands under federal regulations—and that legal constraint shapes county policies ^{[5] [8]}.

4. Local practice is fragmented: some counties decline civil detainers, others work with ICE

Reporting shows that the practical result is a patchwork: Hennepin County and Ramsey County have policies or long-standing practices of not holding people on civil ICE detainers without judicial orders, while the Department of Corrections says it notifies and transfers people in state custody to ICE where required ^{[4] [8] [3]}. ICE enforcement officials have singled out county-level noncooperation as the main problem while Minnesota officials reply that many of DHS’s cited cases never involved state prison custody or are older transfers that were honored ^{[1] [3]}.

5. Political and legal escalation: lawsuits, courts and competing narratives

The clash has rippled into courtroom and political arenas: Minnesota’s attorney general and city officials have sued DHS seeking to restrain what they call an unlawful surge of federal agents and aggressive tactics, and national outlets describe a broader tug-of-war over access, data and jurisdictional authority ^{[9] [7]}. Independent reporting documents examples—such as contentious detentions in the Twin Cities and public outrage—that have intensified the dispute, but none of the assembled sources supplies evidence about a “Henry County” policy position specifically ^{[10] [11]}.

Bottom line

From the provided reporting, there is no evidence to confirm that “Henry County, Minnesota” is refusing to hand over people on ICE detainers; the documented conflict concerns Minnesota state prisons, several named counties (notably Hennepin and Ramsey), the state attorney general’s legal opinion restricting detention on civil detainers, and DHS claims that Minnesota jurisdictions are not consistently honoring ICE requests—claims that state corrections officials dispute and seek to correct with their own data ^{[5] [3] [1] [2]}.